and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Que:A newborn kangaroo, or joey, is born after a short gestation period of only 39 days. At this stage, the joey’s hind limbs are not well developed, but its forelimbs are well developed, so that it can can climb from the cloaca into its mother’s pouch for further development. The recent discovery that ancient marsupial lions were also born with only their forelimbs developed supports the hypothesis that newborn marsupial lions must also have needed to climb into their mothers’ pouches.

Ans:The ancient marsupial lions were also born with only their forelimbs developed .So the conclusion is that the newborn marsupial lions must also have needed to climb into their mothers’ pouches for further development.

[A] All animals that are born after a short gestation period are born with some parts of their bodies underdeveloped.--All animals!!!!!...Come on..I'm just talking about kangaroos and lions.[b] Well developed forelimbs would have been more advantageous to ancient marsupial lions than well developed hind limbs would have been.--Hind limbs were never mentioned in the passage[C] If the newborn marsupial lion did not climb into its mother’s pouch, then paleontologists would be able to find evidence of this fact.--May be true, but this is not tied to the conclusion of the passage[D] Newborn marsupial lions that crawled into their mothers’ pouches could not have done so had they not had only their forelimbs developed at birth.--Look closely at the conclusion. It says that the lions must also have needed to climb. Had the conclusion been "The lions have climbed because they have had only their forelimbs developed at birth", then this option could have been a strong contender. [E] Newborn marsupial lions would not have had only their forelimbs developed if this development were of no use to the marsupial lions--PERFECT!!..Look at the conclusion again.."The lions must also have needed to climb". So the author here is saying that the lions have had only their forelimbs developed at birth and assuming that this development is of some use to them(in this case to climb onto their mothers' pouches). For better understanding, try negating the statement. "The the lions would have had only their forelimbs developed even if this development were of no use". In other words, this development is useless, so this development might not have been useful in climbing onto their mothers' pouches. So the author's conclusion is weakened comprehensively.

Refer to: "The recent discovery that ancient marsupial lions were also born with only their forelimbs developed supports the hypothesis that newborn marsupial lions must also have needed to climb into their mothers’ pouches."

The above hypothesis suggests IF the marsupial lions didn't NEED TO CLIMB into their mother's pouches, they would not have had only their forelimbs developed in the first place, which is reiterated in option E.

Answer is EIf this assumption were not true, the hypothesis that Marsupial Lions must also have needed to climb into their mothers’ pouches would not hold. The argument's assumption hinges on the fact that development of the forelimbs in the newborn Lions served a certain purpose, i.e, it helped aid the newborn to climb into it's mother's pouch

A newborn kangaroo, or joey, is born after a short gestation period of only 39 days. At this stage, the joey’s hind limbs are not well developed, but its forelimbs are well developed, so that it can can climb from the cloaca into its mother’s pouch for further development. The recent discovery that ancient marsupial lions were also born with only their forelimbs developed supports the hypothesis that newborn marsupial lions must also have needed to climb into their mothers’ pouches.

Answer : Option D

The passage shows an analogy between the development of forelimbs in newborn kangaroo and marsupial lions. It suggests that in kangaroos, the forelimbs helped the newborn to get into the mother's pouch. And it supports the hypothesis that newborn marsupial lions must also have needed to climb into their mothers’ pouches by showing the recent discovery of ancient marsupial lions being born with only their forelimbs developed. This clearly leads us to the assumption that forelimbs were necessary for the newborn marsupial lions to crawl into the mother's pouch.

Which is option D.

We can arrive at the answer even by eliminating the choices.

[A] All animals that are born after a short gestation period are born with some parts of their bodies underdeveloped - This is not dealing with the main point of the need of the newborn to crawl into the mother's pouch.

[B] Well developed forelimbs would have been more advantageous to ancient marsupial lions than well developed hind limbs would have been - The comparison made here is wrong because the newborn marsupial lions have ONLY developed forelimbs and NO hindlimbs.

[C] If the newborn marsupial lion did not climb into its mother’s pouch, then paleontologists would be able to find evidence of this fact - Let us attack this option in a different way. What if the new born marsupial lion died as soon it was born, before it could get into the mother's pouch. Paleontologists will now find the evidence that the newborn lion does not climb into the mothers' pouch. However this finding of theirs would be wrong.

[E] Newborn marsupial lions would not have had only their forelimbs developed if this development were of no use to the marsupial lions - This statement suggests that based on its use, an organ is developed. However, it is the opposite. Once an organ is developed, it is put to the best possible use.

[D] Newborn marsupial lions that crawled into their mothers’ pouches could not have done so had they not had only their forelimbs developed at birth - This option clearly tells that for climbing into the mothers' pouch, the newborn needed only their forelimbs developed at birth, thereby supporting the hypothesis - CORRECT ANSWER.

The answer is DFollowing reason to strike out answers1) There is no information about generalization of all animals. So choice A is not correct.2) It is not stated in the passage regarding any advantage of forelimbs.Moreover, we don't know about well developed hindlimbs of marsupial lions. So choice B is not correct.3) No information about paleontologists will find evedence. So choice C is not correct.4) Development of forelimbs helped new born marsupial lions to climb into their mothes' pouches. If this assumption is true, it strongly follows passage conclusion. So choice D is correct.5) Last option is quite far from assumption for passage conclusion. Forelimbs wouldn't have been developed if there was no use claims that there must have some use. But doesn't specify what use and how it supports the conclusion. So choice E is not correct.

ASSUMPTION Question:Passage Diagram:PremiseKangaroo: Hind limbs not well developed but forelimbs develops-->forelimbs used for climbing into mother's pouch for further development.ConclusionMarsupial Lion: Also born with forelimbs developed--> Must has needed to climb into their mother's pouchMissing LinkBefore looking at answer choices: Assumption should be something which shows need of forelimbs for nothing but climbing into their mother's pouch

Answer Choices:

[A] All animals that are born after a short gestation period are born with some parts of their bodies underdeveloped. (Does not mention anything about forelimbs and pouch)[B] Well developed forelimbs would have been more advantageous to ancient marsupial lions than well developed hind limbs would have been. (Does not mention about need of forelimbs for nothing but pouch)[C] If the newborn marsupial lion did not climb into its mother’s pouch, then paleontologists would be able to find evidence of this fact. (Does not mention anything about need of forelimbs)[D] Newborn marsupial lions that crawled into their mothers’ pouches could not have done so had they not had only their forelimbs developed at birth. (Tempting- but it repeats conclusion)[E] Newborn marsupial lions would not have had only their forelimbs developed if this development were of no use to the marsupial lions. (Left with E. Mentions about need of forelimbs)

Answer is E

Hope my answer is correct ..

Last edited by prasrush2001 on 03 Sep 2011, 06:03, edited 1 time in total.

An assumption is what is absolutely necessary for the conclusion to hold. In other words, the assumption is the unstated premise of the argument. While there are several assumptions made in an argument (all of which have to be true), only one will be present in the answer choice. So, the trick to spot one is not to find the choice that validates the conclusion, but to find the choice that is an essential piece of information for the conclusion to be true. Also, along with supporting the conclusion, the assumption must also link the premises with the conclusion. Negating the assumption will destroy the argument.

The question asks for an assumption. Hence, the argument will consist of premises and conclusion.

Breaking down the argument structure as premises and conclusion, we have;

Premise 1: Joey (newborn kangaroo), born after a short gestation period of 39 days, (at birth) does not have well-developed hindlimbs However, Joey's forelimbs are well developedso that (i.e. the purpose of well developed forelimbs is that) Joey can climb from cloaca into its mother's pouch for further development.Premise 2: The recent discovery is that ancient marsupial lions were also born with only their forelims developed.Conclusion: This discovery (of ancient marsupial lions) supports the hypothesis that newborn marsupial lions must also have needed to climb into their mother's pouch.

(Please note the underlined keywords that are crucial in the line of reasoning in the argument and that represent the core point of the argument).

So here we go. The important words here are so that.The argument's line of reasoning is that, as development of only forelimbs in kangaroos is for the purpose of Joey's climbing in its mother's pouch, the development of only forelimbs in ancient marsupial lions also implies that they needed to climb into their mother's pouch.One of the assumptions made here is that the one definite purpose that only the forelimbs would develop in ancient marsupial lions would be to climb into their mother's pouch.We will look for a choice that ties together premises and conclusion.

[A] All animals that are born after a short gestation period are born with some parts of their bodies underdeveloped. - The choice is too broad. In fact, this choice has no links to the conclusion. the author does not assume that anything about all animals born after a short gestation period. In fact, the author does not mention the gestation period of ancient marsupial lions being short either! The conclusion would hold even if this choice were not true. Hence, this is not an assumption.

[B] Well developed forelimbs would have been more advantageous to ancient marsupial lions than well developed hind limbs would have been. - The author does not assume this. Even if well developed forelimbs were not more advantageous than well developed hindlimbs, the conclusion would hold true. This choice is too broad in that term advantageous does not suggest that the advantage was specifically for the purpose to climbing into the mother's pouch. Also, this choice has not link to the conclusion.

[C] If the newborn marsupial lion did not climb into its mother’s pouch, then paleontologists would be able to find evidence of this fact.This seems close but not accurate. This choice does address the conclusion. However, it does not bridge the gap between the premises and the conclusion. Paleontologists are beyond the scope of the argument. This does not address the line of reasoning, though it addresses the conclusion. That paleontologists would be able to find the evidence if the assumption were not true, is not an assumption here.This is a trap choice - close but wrong. Strategically placed before the correct one

[D] Newborn marsupial lions that crawled into their mothers’ pouches could not have done so had they not had only their forelimbs developed at birth. - Beware! This is a trap choice. This suggests that the the only means of climbing into mother's pouch is having only well developed forelimbs. HOWEVER, the assumption is actually that atlease one definite purpose of well developed forelimbs is climbing into the pouch.Further, it is possible that the lions or Joey had other means to climb into the pouches, in addition to well developed forelimbs. The argument foes not deal with them. It only says that the purpose of forelimbs was climbing in the pouch.

[E] Newborn marsupial lions would not have had only their forelimbs developed if this development were of no use to the marsupial lions - This choice is broad but decent. Use here does not indicate climbing into the mother's pouch. Negating this would mean that newborn lions may have had only their forelimbs developed even if this development were of not use to them. This is it! This version destroys the argument that the puspose of development of forelimbs was to climb into the pouch, as negating the choice indicates the possibility that the development may have been purposeleess.This choice might be too broad or inadequate in that the term use is too broad. However, it is one of the subtle assumptions made in drawing the conclusion! _________________

A newborn kangaroo, or joey, is born after a short gestation period of only 39 days. At this stage, the joey’s hind limbs are not well developed, but its forelimbs are well developed, so that it can can climb from the cloaca into its mother’s pouch for further development. The recent discovery that ancient marsupial lions were also born with only their forelimbs developed supports the hypothesis that newborn marsupial lions must also have needed to climb into their mothers’ pouches.

The argument in this passage relies on which of the following assumptions?

[A] All animals that are born after a short gestation period are born with some parts of their bodies underdeveloped.[B] Well developed forelimbs would have been more advantageous to ancient marsupial lions than well developed hind limbs would have been.[C] If the newborn marsupial lion did not climb into its mother’s pouch, then paleontologists would be able to find evidence of this fact.[D] Newborn marsupial lions that crawled into their mothers’ pouches could not have done so had they not had only their forelimbs developed at birth.[E] Newborn marsupial lions would not have had only their forelimbs developed if this development were of no use to the marsupial lions.

According to me the answer is "E"

Reason for my ans: The assumption in Option E is simply one which eliminates any/all other alternate causes for the given conclusion which is:" newborn marsupial lions must also have needed(forelimbs) to climb into their mothers’ pouches."If we simply negate the assumption in E the conclusion collapses. Hence E

IMO:E. A feature in the development of a new born kangaroo is mentioned and a parallel is drawn assuming that the same development in new born newborn marsupial lion was for the similar purpose with the assumption that otherwise it would have not have occured in the first place. I think E covers it all.

Last edited by chandu4gmat on 04 Sep 2011, 03:36, edited 1 time in total.